Thread: Professors threaten bad grades for saying ‘illegal alien,’ ‘male,’ ‘female’

Today at 9:45 AM EDT
Peter Hasson

*Washington State students risk a failing grade in one course if they use any common descriptors professor considers “oppressive and hateful language.”

*In another class, students will lose one point every time they use the words “illegal alien” or “illegals” rather than the preferred terms of “‘undocumented’ migrants/immigrants/persons.”



Multiple professors at Washington State University have explicitly told students their grades will suffer if they use terms such as “illegal alien,” "male," and “female,” or if they fail to “defer” to non-white students.

According to the syllabus for Selena Lester Breikss’ “Women & Popular Culture” class, students risk a failing grade if they use any common descriptors that Breikss considers “oppressive and hateful language.”

The punishment for repeatedly using the banned words, Breikss warns, includes “but [is] not limited to removal from the class without attendance or participation points, failure of the assignment, and— in extreme cases— failure for the semester.”

Breikss is not the only WSU faculty member implementing such policies.

Much like in Selena Breikss’s classroom, students taking Professor Rebecca Fowler’s “ Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies” course will see their grades suffer if they use the term “illegal alien” in their assigned writing.

According to her syllabus, students will lose one point every time they use the words “illegal alien” or “illegals” rather than the preferred terms of “‘undocumented’ migrants/immigrants/persons.” Throughout the course, Fowler says, students will “come to recognize how white privilege functions in everyday social structures and institutions.”

In an email to Campus Reform, Fowler complained that “the term ‘illegal alien’ has permeated dominant discourses that circulate in the news to the extent that our society has come to associate ALL unauthorized border crossings with those immigrants originating from countries south of our border (and not with Asian immigrants, for example, many of whom are also in the country without legal documents and make up a considerable portion of undocumented immigrants living in the country).”

“The socio-legal production of migrant illegality works to systematically dehumanize and exploit these brown bodies for their labor,” Fowler continued.

White students in Professor John Streamas’s “ Introduction to Multicultural Literature” class, are expected to “defer” to non-white students, among other community guidelines, if they want “to do well in this class.”

In the guidelines in his syllabus, Streamas elaborates that he requires students to “reflect” on their grasp of history and social relations “by respecting shy and quiet classmates and by deferring to the experiences of people of color.”

Streamas—who previously generated controversy by calling a student a “ white shitbag” and declared that WSU should stand for “White Supremacist University”—also demands that students “understand and consider the rage of people who are victims of systematic injustice.”

Later in the syllabus, Streamas goes even further and accuses Glenn Beck of being an “insensitive white.”

Several other WSU professors require their students to “acknowledge that racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, and other institutionalized forms of oppression exist” or that “ we do not live in a post-racial world.”

Ari Cohn, a lawyer with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, told Campus Reformhe considers such requirements to be contradictory, even given the sensitive nature of the courses.

"It is notable that one of the syllabus provisions warns: ‘The subject material of this class is sensitive and controversial. Strive to keep an open mind.’ How are students supposed to approach these sensitive and controversial materials at all, let alone to keep an open mind, if they have to fear that a misconstrued statement, or one that unreasonably offends a classmate will lead to a grade reduction or even removal from class?"

http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6770

So much for open debate and discussion at Washington State, huh. So much for teaching freedom of speech, eh? If I lived in Washington I would be demanding that the legislature defund that college totally and immediately. America has turned the other cheek too often in the interest of political correctness. There is no way in hell to be political correct and be honest with others. Without honesty you cannot build community!

It's outrageous, and it must be stopped. I guess Washington State has a bunch of illegal aliens in its public university. Someone should do a raid. Might wind up with some teachers who have the same status.

Professors ban the words 'male,' 'female,' 'illegal alien,' and 'colored people' from class

September 1, 2015

PULLMAN, WA (KHQ) Too harsh or respect the rules? That's the question on Washington State University's campus after some professors included a section in their class syllabi prohibiting certain language in their classes with potential consequences of failing a class.

Fall classes began last Monday and with those classes for some students came strict rules about language they cannot use in class. Some professors in the Department of Criticial Culture, Gender and Race Studies made it clear in their syllabi what language and terms students are not allowed to use, with a result potentially as dramatic as getting points docked or even failing a class.

"That's kind of harsh, but you live with it," says senior Anthony Lui. "There are rules in this world, you kind of have to follow them."

In one class the terms "illegal alien", "colored people" and "male" and "female" are cited in the syllabus as words that could gain a student an F.

"I think it's unfair. A lot of students look at it as illegal immigrants," says Mikayla Taflinger, a freshman. "That's how we see it in our newsfeed, all over CNN and Fox News that's what they call them. Illegal immigrants."

http://www.news3lv.com/content/news/...Or--9s0gw.cspx

Washington State U disavows syllabus with ban on certain words

Inside Higher Ed

Ban on Banning Words

Washington State U disavows syllabus with ban on certain words

September 1, 2015

By Scott Jaschik


Washington State University on Monday announced that it would not allow instructors to make "blanket" bans on the use of certain words or phrases in class, even if those words and phrases offend people.

Further, the university said that instructors could not punish students for use of such words or phrases.

The announcement followed a barrage of criticism of the syllabus for Women & Popular Culture, a women's studies course, that banned specific words and phrases and set out punishments for their use.
Here is the language on the syllabus:

"Gross generalizations, stereotypes and derogatory/oppressive language are not acceptable. Use of racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, classist or generally offensive language in class or submission of such material will not be tolerated. (This includes 'The Man,' 'Colored People,' 'Illegals/Illegal Aliens,' 'Tranny' and so on -- or referring to women/men as females or males.) If I see it or hear it, I will correct it in class since it can be a learning moment for many students. Repeated use of oppressive and hateful language will be handled accordingly -- including but not limited to removal from the class without attendance or participation points, failure of the assignment, and -- in extreme cases -- failure for the semester."

This summer has seen several instances in which websites of various college or university groups have featured language discouraging the use of words and phrases that many find offensive. There was much discussion in July about the "bias-free language guide" at the University of New Hampshire, but UNH never actually banned any words or phrases. One office published some recommendations for those seeking to avoid offending others, and most people at UNH didn't know that the guide existed until it was debated nationally -- and the university affirmed that there was no requirement to follow its suggestions.

In the Washington State syllabus, however, there was a specific statement that the instructor could punish any students using the banned words and phrases. And that appears to have led the university (which, as a public institution, must provide First Amendment protections) to get involved. The university statement said that it was asking all faculty members to review their policies "to ensure that students’ right to freedom of expression is protected along with a safe and productive learning environment."

The statement said: "Over the weekend, we became aware that some faculty members, in the interest of fostering a constructive climate for discussion, included language in class syllabi that has been interpreted as abridging students’ free speech rights. We are working with these faculty members to clarify, and in some cases modify, course policies to ensure that students’ free speech rights are recognized and protected. No student will have points docked merely as a result of using terms that may be deemed offensive to some.

Blanket restriction of the use of certain terms is not consistent with the values upon which this university is founded. Free speech and a constructive climate for learning are not incompatible. We aim to cultivate diversity of expression while protecting individual rights and safety."

Selena Lester Breikss, the instructor, referred questions on her syllabus to the university's public relations office.

Henry Reichman, professor emeritus of history at California State University at East Bay and chair of the American Association of University Professors' Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure, said via email that there are multiple issues at play in the debate over the Washington State syllabus.

"Faculty members have the right to take measures designed to ensure a classroom atmosphere conducive to free and open discussion and debate," Reichman said. And he noted that the syllabus doesn't just ban some words or phrases, but references the value of civilized debate. He pointed with favor to a part of the syllabus that says: "We all have differing opinions, beliefs and practices. The course materials may challenge your personal beliefs or opinions, and this is an open space to discuss these disagreements in a civilized, academic manner."

The problem, Reichman said, is that "blanket bans on specific words or expressions that some may find offensive would seem actually to contradict the true spirit of open and free discussion."

The AAUP opposes speech codes, Reichman said. And while AAUP policy specifically condemns institutional speech codes, he said that "the underlying principle itself should also apply to individual faculty members insofar as the views or words expressed by students in class are relevant to the course material."

He praised Washington State for saying that it was working with faculty members on these issues. "I am confident that the appropriate educational aims of the faculty members involved, and their academic freedom to control curriculum, can and will be consistent with protection of their students' rights to free expression and open debate," he said.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...-certain-words